Vishali Moond, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Bhargav Koyani, Shahab R Khan, Lena L Kassab, Saurabh Chandan, Babu P Mohan, Arkady Broder, Douglas G Adler
{"title":"EUS 引导下肝胃切除术的有效性和安全性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Vishali Moond, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Bhargav Koyani, Shahab R Khan, Lena L Kassab, Saurabh Chandan, Babu P Mohan, Arkady Broder, Douglas G Adler","doi":"10.1097/eus.0000000000000055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11577,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopic Ultrasound","volume":"13 3","pages":"171-182"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419430/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Vishali Moond, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Bhargav Koyani, Shahab R Khan, Lena L Kassab, Saurabh Chandan, Babu P Mohan, Arkady Broder, Douglas G Adler\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/eus.0000000000000055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound\",\"volume\":\"13 3\",\"pages\":\"171-182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419430/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/eus.0000000000000055\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopic Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/eus.0000000000000055","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided hepatogastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) is one of the preferred methods in biliary drainage where ERCP fails or is contraindicated. The clinical outcomes of EUS-HGS are not well studied because of variability in procedure technique. We conducted a search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception through January 2023. The clinical outcomes studied were pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Standard meta-analysis methods were used using the random-effects model, and heterogeneity was studied by I2 statistics. We analyzed 44 studies, which included 19 prospective and 25 retrospective studies. The pooled technical success rate of EUS-HGS was 94.4% (confidence interval [CI], 92.4%-95.9%; I2 = 0%), and the pooled clinical success rate was 88.6% (CI, 83.7%-92.2%; I2 = 0%). The pooled adverse outcomes with EUS-HGS were 23.8% (CI, 19.6%-28.5%; I2 = 0%). The mild adverse event rate associated with HGS was 5.8% (4.2%-8.1%; I2 = 0%), moderate adverse event rate was 12.1% (9.1%-15.8%; I2 = 16%), and severe adverse event rate was 4.2% (3.0%-5.7%; I2 = 61%), whereas fatal adverse event rate was 3.2% (1.9%-5.4%; I2 = 62%). On subgroup analysis, the pooled rate of adverse events of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2%-21.0%). The pooled technical success with EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting was 89.7% (95% CI, 82.6%-94.2%), and clinical success was 92.5% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.7%). On the basis of our analysis of EUS-HGS, the overall technical success was 94.4%, and the clinical success rate was 88.6%, and the overall adverse events were reported to be 23.8%. These data can also help improve the clinical benefits of EUS-HGS in the selected patients in whom it is performed.
期刊介绍:
Endoscopic Ultrasound, a publication of Euro-EUS Scientific Committee, Asia-Pacific EUS Task Force and Latin American Chapter of EUS, is a peer-reviewed online journal with Quarterly print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.eusjournal.com. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository. The journal does not charge for submission, processing or publication of manuscripts and even for color reproduction of photographs.